he said that. and then -- and we think it's been a big mistake. disa pointed on a number of fronts. he said he was going to be transparent and cut back on bush's secrecy, and in most ways he has not followed through... ...

>> okay negative had 300 supporters in yemen but last year they had 700. but that could backfire. just like the times square bomber. >> host: we have one minute left. but with a counter addition what foreign policy do you think you should have? what would you do?

>> with compassion and a love of mankind with the global purpose. the century of the common man seems to be paramount because we have more knowledge. the world can cooperate and i think globalization is not us with the bigger shirk but cooperating. that is the century i want to live bin. >> 300 people have more wealth than 300 million and the wal-mart shares are richest and the top 1 percent have more wealth than the bottom 90 percent we need to redistribute resources. >> they say you cannot live like that. there is always the bad guy.

now is the chinese. it is an old argument we become the bad guy because nobody yaks worse than we do. >> we have the power and ironically it was our space that now devolves into the space electronic shield, a triple canopy by 2025, we could become a fascist force for control. we are. like "star wars" and george lucas. will we follow our heart or follow the base instincts? >> host: think you.

>> host: john jackson, jr. professor of africana studies at it ever since pennsylvania and author of "racial paranoia" the unintended consequences of political correctness". dr. jackson talking about "racial paranoia" who is paranoid? >> guest: we're all paranoid when it comes to race. for good reason. one point* that i make as a category itself is about the way we look at social life. some better so paramount we have to be on the lookout at all times. so race itself is about vera and social paranoia. but think about the country like the united states we

could have 2 miles -- mottoes. try to build a community but the other is post ratio of the by oppression. don't say a word. that is a very different project but they're both under that umbrella. >> host: go to the second example to ignore or not talk about race. >> it is important not to make a fetish but the danger is to imagine that is not already in the room. so we have to be careful to bracket out serious discussions is it is a historical position. that the only way to move

forward is to not pretend for we have gone up already or for what we want the community to become we have to understand the differences. it is of fine nine to make a fetish but also the moment to feel everybody has a vested interest. >> host: professor jackson what is the role of political correctness with race? >> guest: it is easier to take a potshot. and tries to place a premium that we do not want to offend people or make them feel uncomfortable but the downside is when that is connected to any discussion of race at all. when you're not talking about race and the social

network is not racially diverse you have the limited view of the social other. maybe books or magazines or television but not real relationships. for those people to put you in this precarious position because you don't have an investment. even if someone said something you don't like you are invested. if you don't like them to say i will not talk to you. it is dangerous to have that lack of substantive agreement at the expense of talking seriously about the issues. we need to find a way to

talk about things that they're uncomfortable but not pretend we say things that we imbeded will not offend. i try to argue political correctness means we can double down on repression. >> host: what is an example that you use? >> guest: the idea, it is our fault coming out of the of the data to the election. people talked about the idea there was something going on and that could be the first black president that seemed almost antithetical of everything we had imagined.

one of the moments was the time obama had to talk explicitly about race. right here in philadelphia. but as the first black president can talk the least about race. he knows he cannot discuss it but part of what he tried to do was say let me say something to bring people together then i don't have to bring it up again. that was quintessential paranoia that americans are so acute, resistant, to even bring up the idea they will disqualify from the highest

lot of the land. to say there are ways to address differences, racial or class but it brings a buddy together. that is a nice model. it doesn't have to be race specific to have racial equality everybody to have a piece of the pie but the irony is a dedicated to invoke race disqualifies because people are so upset and alienated of racial inequality and discrimination. it is an incredible difficult scenario to stand up as a first black president cannot talk about race because that would define the disqualification. their own negotiating same periodic -- variations.

>> host: are white americans' overly sensitive with the race card? >> guest: we all are. for good reason. but the difference is the way white americans can afford to say let's get over race and move on. we don't have to wallow of what we know about history. it is easy that if we look the other way that is the logic of a certain perspective. i a understand the tension with interracial relationships.

but the white people want to move forward if you don't bring up race we will do things publicly to bring people in. why do you try to us back to the 19th century with pre-civil rights? isn't america different now? is but powdery push ourselves to be inclusive? the only way to do it it is a fine way to talk about it. listening. not just talking. we wait our turn then we camber them but give in the other person's shoes. think about a white person who knows the witness does not have the same power it did 50 years ago. of browning of america produced the first black

president and something about listening to that fear is legitimate and those in power have to give it up. we have to listen to the other side to figure out the common ground to push to a place we can feel good about what is possible if we come together and think critically of our past to imagine our future together. >> host: what type of class is to teach? >> guest: i do a lot of film. i am also a film maker. refocus on graduate courses for mediums for scholarships. they say they like the books but the only people there reid them are the scholars but in a film everybody will see the project.

that is essential but also the idea if you think about the world and use film to tell a story it may allow you to say different things but it is a good vehicle to produce these scholarships for your colleagues. what about the visual dissertation or produces knowledge with images and sound to count as scholarship the way a journal article would count. we do a lot of that work with the graduate curriculum. i am now finishing a syllabus now how to do anthropological research where everything is on nine.

it was not built to do that type of work so hard to read do that? >> host: who is and throw me and? >> guest: a super hero i created for myself when i was doing my dissertation. anthropolanthropol ogist makes a living by talking to people. one of my problems in bad school is i was incredibly shy. it is hard to strike up conversations with people i don't know. so anthro man gave me the confidence to talk to people and eventually i did not need him but there is

something about being an anthropologist because you imagine you can say something about what defines a human being differently. it is incredibly ambitious and anthro man lets me playfully mark that ambition. a message with they could say about the social world. >> host: what is your background? >> guest: native new yorker group in brooklyn. public schools. brooklyn technical high school. then went to d.c. with an undergraduate to study film at howard. then decided to do an apology because i can have

my cake and eat it too. i could make a film and be part of my a identity. as a literary professor i could make a film as a hobby but anthropology has a history of using this equipment with their research. i thought i could still make a movie but in the context to have license to find things out about the world. so now we do things digitally. we still use 16 mm film and cutting things with tape i was a kid from brooklyn who did not know enough about the world but anthropology will allow me to learn something.

>> host: why were you raised in brooklyn? >> my mom and dad both were working class and to do a particular type of work my mom went back to school to get her college degree and they were continuing to struggle into the a learner to better themselves to gain more knowledge so part of what i got from them you never stop to translate which you are learning to be

productive psittacine of the of world. so they've model that's. >> host: professor where did you get your ph.d.? >> columbia. then cambridge massachusetts i could do film work and then off to the races. >> host: this is your third book? "racial paranoia" what about day shall? >> the quintessential example someone who had had enough's of race. he was famous for pushing the envelope.

they were funny and poignant at the same time. they're trying to give him $50 million because he imagined the way you wish using race that was backfiring but reenforcing the worst animus he could not distinguish between what was progressive for doing more harm than good. >> host: are we paranoid with stereotype? >> guest: by definition they are a normalization. we are very sensitive. psychologists say we not only have to negotiate but when we actually operates that we perform differently

as a threat to reproduce so 3e know people the mentioned we know people the mentioned who we are before we open our mouths. sometimes it is a good thing but what they think they get especially with less than flattering or notion of what it means especially if we're different. >> host: to other examples in your book cynthia mckinney a member of congress try to get into her place of employment. >> guest: it is an important and new ones example by people can become so frustrated.

in the instance race is not the issue. i try to go to a space where i belong. somebody is stopping me from entering. and must be something other than i don't have smite id or i am boisterous. we see their racial paranoia is that about up for population to find a way to want to be heard but to have these moments in a flash. but we are not sure. but there is no open and shut case. so to have somebody to say we don't want you in the town. a cop does not say racist

things. but part of what they imagine is this is the politically correct way to do that. to disqualify me without invoking race but it is more slippery than the ways that you could imagine. >> guest. >> host: in your view professor jackson, are white people unfairly tarnished with the race card brush and do you include examples? >> guest: i decided to focus on how african-americans understand race through social paranoia. it might make sense how race functions. but at the same time it